﻿ V536. Be advised that the utilized constant value is represented by an octal form.  # V536. Be advised that the utilized constant value is represented by an octal form.

Using constants in the octal number system is not an error in itself. This system is convenient when handling bits and is used in code that interacts with a network or external devices. However, an average programmer uses this number system rarely and therefore may make a mistake by writing 0 before a number forgetting that it makes this value an octal number.

The analyzer warns about octal constants if there are no other octal constants nearby. Such "single" octal constants are usually errors.

Let's study a sample taken from a real application. It is rather large but it illustrates the sense of the issue very well.

``````inline
void elxLuminocity(const PixelRGBf& iPixel,
LuminanceCell< PixelRGBf >& oCell)
{
oCell._luminance = 0.2220f*iPixel._red +
0.7067f*iPixel._blue +
0.0713f*iPixel._green;
oCell._pixel = iPixel;
}

inline
void elxLuminocity(const PixelRGBi& iPixel,
LuminanceCell< PixelRGBi >& oCell)
{
oCell._luminance = 2220*iPixel._red +
7067*iPixel._blue +
0713*iPixel._green;
oCell._pixel = iPixel;
}``````

It is hard to find the error while reviewing this code, but it does have an error. The first function elxLuminocity is correct and handles values of the 'float' type. There are the following constants in the code: 0.2220f, 0.7067f, 0.0713f. The second function is similar to the first but it handles integer values. All the integer values are multiplied by 10000. Here are they: 2220, 7067, 0713. The error is that the last constant "0713" is defined in the octal number system and its value is 459, not 713. This is the correct code:

``````oCell._luminance = 2220*iPixel._red +
7067*iPixel._blue +
713*iPixel._green;``````

As it was said above, the warning of octal constants is generated only if there are no other octal constants nearby. That is why the analyzer considers the following sample safe and does not produce any warnings for it:

``````static unsigned short bytebit = {
01, 02, 04, 010, 020, 040, 0100, 0200 };``````
 According to Common Weakness Enumeration, potential errors found by using this diagnostic are classified as CWE-682.
 You can look at examples of errors detected by the V536 diagnostic.

384
13 926

### Do you make errors in the code? 